ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2026
Development of a novel GP continuity measurement for practices without personal lists: a two-practice pilot of the modified SLICC.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuity of care measurement across health systems: UK and US insights for global primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
- GP continuity of care can be regained: lessons from Finland.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is widely recognised that continuity of GP care should be improved. This requires a continuity measure that is applicable to all practices. Previous measures have limitations.
aimTo develop an improved measure of continuity of care and compare its performance with established measures. DESIGN AND
settingAudit data were used to conduct a 1-year pilot of the measure in two suburban general practices in Devon, England.
methodThe modified St Leonard's Index of Continuity of Care (mSLICC) was developed; scores were calculated monthly, and compared with those generated using the St Leonard's Index of Continuity of Care (SLICC), the 1-year Bice-Boxerman Continuity of Care (BB), and Usual Provider of Care (UPC) indices. Proportions of patients and appointments included were calculated, with patients grouped by age, sex, 3-year appointment numbers, and frailty categories.
resultsIn the two practices, the mSLICC included 19 840 of 29 127 (68.1%) appointments and a mean of 65.2% (standard deviation [SD] 6.4%) of patients with appointments. The UPC and BB included 21 032 (72.2%) appointments and 4096 (41.3%) of 9924 patients with appointments. In practice A, the mSLICC score was 52.0%, the SLICC score was 57.1%, the mean UPC score was 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.62 to 0.64), and the mean BB score was 0.41 (95% CI = 0.40 to 0.43). In practice B, the mSLICC score was 25.9%, the SLICC score was 25.3%, the mean UPC score was 0.50 (95% CI = 0.49 to 0.51), and the mean BB score was 0.23 (95% CI = 0.22 to 0.25). The mSLICC correlated with the SLICC (
conclusionThe mSLICC is a new monthly measure of continuity. It has fewer limitations than the BB and UPC, and does not require a named GP. With sufficient IT resources, the mSLICC could be used to measure continuity of care in practices that do not use personal lists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.